[Discussion] Sexual Abuse Claims Against MJ Estate - Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe

[InvincibleMJ]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

for anyone wondering: online system still not showing robson's amended complaint

What are the odds it's sealed? How many sealed complaints did he file until now (except for the first one?)

I wonder did he file one on Dec 16? Imo i do not think anyone came forward to said that they knew or were aware that this was happening to Wade i could be wrong.
Who know what Wade and his lawyers has up they sleeves

I have no doubt that he filed the amended complaint by the deadline. Isn't that the one that had to be changed to negligence? That would break his case if not.
I wish we could see it.

I too doubt the complaint wasn't filed. Wouldn't it be like giving up on the case? I really curious to see how he's going to make the third parties part stick. Does he have to give actual names? That should be tricky.

 

[ivy]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

No one knows the answer to pminton's question which I didn't see as a question but a train of thought she expressed out loud.

Just last night I wrote "for anyone wondering: online system still not showing robson's amended complaint". That means we don't know if he filed it, we don't know when he filed it, we don't know if/when it will show up on the system (as I mentioned before documents take anytime between 1-8 days to show on the system, judge might redact documents which take 2-4 weeks and sealed documents doesn't show up on the system). We don't know if there was an extension request or not. So unless either Robson's amended complaint or any other relevant document (such as dismissal request, an opposition/answer, status report, order etc.)shows in the system we wouldn't know what's going on. It's a waiting game right now.

edited to add

What are the odds it's sealed? How many sealed complaints did he file until now (except for the first one?)

first probate complaint was filed temporary under seal which the judge decided to redact parts and release it. Then the judge did the redaction while getting recommendations from parties. I think that redaction took at least a month. The civil complaint wasn't filed under seal because it was against the corporations and didn't include details of the sexual abuse claims. But now he's amending his complaint and it's anyone's guess if he's naming people, listing accusations and so on. So sealing/redaction could be happening here, it could have been filed under temporary seal and requiring a redaction process. We'll see.

I'm checking it every day twice - one at noon pst and one at 5 pm pst. Today I just saw Dec 17 continuance notice in Tohme case being added to the system. So I think Robson amended complaint should show up soon too - if there's no redaction/sealing or any extension.

 

[HIStory]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I know we are all impatient and everything but I actually do not wish to spend my Christmas with Robson's crap so if it has not been published so far then I hope it will only be published after the holidays. I don't know how it is in the US but where I live all public offices, courts etc. close down for Christmas, so if it's so in the US as well I think chances are that we will only hear about the case after the holidays.

 

[InvincibleMJ]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

We'll find out eventually if it's anything important.

I take it as the press completley lost interest? No known reporters are going to the hearing? I guess it's good we have to dig these docs out ourselves...

 

[ivy]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I don't know how it is in the US but where I live all public offices, courts etc. close down for Christmas

December 25th and January 1st are federal holidays so court will be closed at those two dates. It's hard to know judge's own calendar. Holidays definitely slow down the clerk's office and scanning of documents into the online system.

 

[Tygger]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

InvincibleTal, it is over as far as I can see. Feel free to PM me with any issue you may continue to have.

 

[#MJforever57]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

No one knows the answer to pminton's question which I didn't see as a question but a train of thought she expressed out loud.

Just last night I wrote "for anyone wondering: online system still not showing robson's amended complaint". That means we don't know if he filed it, we don't know when he filed it, we don't know if/when it will show up on the system (as I mentioned before documents take anytime between 1-8 days to show on the system, judge might redact documents which take 2-4 weeks and sealed documents doesn't show up on the system). We don't know if there was an extension request or not. So unless either Robson's amended complaint or any other relevant document (such as dismissal request, an opposition/answer, status report, order etc.)shows in the system we wouldn't know what's going on. It's a waiting game right now.


first probate complaint was filed temporary under seal which the judge decided to redact parts and release it. Then the judge did the redaction while getting recommendations from parties. I think that redaction took at least a month. The civil complaint wasn't filed under seal because it was against the corporations and didn't include details of the sexual abuse claims. But now he's amending his complaint and it's anyone's guess if he's naming people, listing accusations and so on. So sealing/redaction could be happening here, it could have been filed under temporary seal and requiring a redaction process. We'll see.

I'm checking it every day twice - one at noon pst and one at 5 pm pst. Today I just saw Dec 17 continuance notice in Tohme case being added to the system. So I think Robson amended complaint should show up soon too - if there's no redaction/sealing or any extension.

Ivy you are right i was thinking out loud. I had some more questions for you but i see you have answer those questions in this post too.

I have no doubt that he filed the amended complaint by the deadline. Isn't that the one that had to be changed to negligence? That would break his case if not.
I wish we could see it.

You right that why i said that because he had to prove that MJ and the companies were negligence. yes it will. I wish we can too.

What are the odds it's sealed? How many sealed complaints did he file until now (except for the first one?)


I too doubt the complaint wasn't filed. Wouldn't it be like giving up on the case? I really curious to see how he's going to make the third parties part stick. Does he have to give actual names? That should be tricky.

He might have done that.

In the bold exactly how is he going to do this he has to find ppls who knew and if he did not do that the judge might dismiss the case and remember what the judge said he might remove MJ and his companies because you can not sue a dead man and his Estate that one thing both parties agree on so the judge migth make a decision on that.

 

[InvincibleMJ]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

He might have done that.

In the bold exactly how is he going to do this he has to find ppls who knew and if he did not do that the judge might dismiss the case and remember what the judge said he might remove MJ and his companies because you can not sue a dead man and his Estate that one thing both parties agree on so the judge migth make a decision on that.

And when he does give the names, he still has to prove they knew. These people are obviously not going to say they knew and cooperate with these bogus claims. I can't really see how this is going to work for him really.

 

[barbee0715]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I want him to name lots of names so they can sue the heck out of him.

 

[HIStory]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

And when he does give the names, he still has to prove they knew. These people are obviously not going to say they knew and cooperate with these bogus claims. I can't really see how this is going to work for him really.

Even if they found someone who worked at these companies and whom they could pay off to say he or she knew it still would not be enough. One person knowing but never telling is not enough - it would be his or her personal responsibility that he or she supposedly knew but did not do anything about it, not the companys'. In that case Robson should sue that person, not MJ's companies. And now I'm putting aside the problem of how anyone could have known when Robson himself states in his lawsuit that the first person he ever told was his therapist in 2012. So the only way to claim such a thing would be to claim that someone witnessed something. But then that would be a can of worms for that person starting with the question that all these years - 1993, 2005 etc. - why didn't he or she ever tell this important info to authroities? And this still would not help Robson if this person kept this alleged info to himself/herself and never reported to anyone within the company. What he really needs to allege is some organized, company-level cover-up, not some indivudual knowing. Plus what Robson needs to prove is that people who had control over MJ knew and did not use that control to do anything about it and protect Robson. I can't see how they could have such a case - the first problem being that no one in MJ's companies was in the position to have control over MJ, since MJ was the sole owner and boss. So the whole thing is problematic on many levels.

 

[InvincibleMJ]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

In that case Robson should sue that person, not MJ's companies.

This is my main issue with it, even if he finds that person he should sue them, not Michael.

What he really needs to allege is some organized, company-level cover-up, not some indivudual knowing. Plus what Robson needs to prove is that people who had control over MJ knew and did not use that control to do anything about it and protect Robson.

That would mean his list should be people we already know? His managers? His Lawyers? People like Frank? Branca? Nobody could "control" Michael like that anyway, but who can they possibly bring up?

I can't see how they could have such a case - the first problem being that no one in MJ's companies was in the position to have control over MJ, since MJ was the sole owner and boss. So the whole thing is problematic on many levels.

I really don't understand this part of the lawsuit even though it's the only part that has a legal ground

 

[#MJforever57]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I agree i just do not see this working either

 

[#MJforever57]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I want him to name lots of names so they can sue the heck out of him.

Exactly.

 

[HIStory]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

We can speculate about whom he will name and what he will claim until the cows go home but ultimately we will have to wait and see. This is Christmas Eve, guys, let's try to relax and think about more pleasant things than Robson and what crap he will throw at Michael - at least today.

 

[barbee0715]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Yes. I wish Fuse or somebody would run a big Michael video marathon or something.

 

[ivy]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

For anyone wondering still no amended civil complaint or any decision about safechuck demurrer. Court is closed tomorrow - Dec 25th.

The probate case is showing another demurrer filing and hearing for January 15. It's highly possible that it might be related to Tohme case as several Tohme related motions have been delayed to Jan 15.

 

[#MJforever57]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

We can speculate about whom he will name and what he will claim until the cows go home but ultimately we will have to wait and see. This is Christmas Eve, guys, let's try to relax and think about more pleasant things than Robson and what crap he will throw at Michael - at least today.

Respect77 you are so right i was relax i had a great day at work on Christmas Eve i watch Michael's Bad concert. We had a potluck at work the food was so good i really enjoy myself.

 

[HIStory]

Going through old articles from 2005, I found this interesting piece about Safechuck. Well, well....

Police Seek Additional Alleged Jackson Victims - Questioned Boys Deny Abuse (Jan 7 2005)

by whisper » Sat Jan 08, 2005 1:56 am
Police Seek Additional Alleged Jackson Victims

January 7, 2005

Exclusive: Just three weeks before the scheduled start of Michael Jackson's child molestation trial, "Celebrity Justice" has learned Santa Barbara investigators are trying to nail down an old case against the pop star that first investigated more than a decade ago.

According to "CJ" Executive Producer Harvey Levin, "It's pretty stunning that, literally at the 12th hour, the police are out in full force in Southern California, trying to dig up other alleged victims. You would think, at this point, prosecutors are working on opening statements."

Back during Jackson's "Bad Tour" in the late 1980s, published reports claimed that the superstar met up and shopped for toys in London with another Southern California boy, then said to be about 10 years old.

A private eye told "CJ" he was recently contacted by Santa Barbara detectives seeking information on that boy's family. The gumshoe told us he sent police several photos, which he says are of the boy's mother and father and the family's home.

Cops are chasing down rumors that Jackson may have purchased the home for the family -- rumors we're told the family vehemently denies. Just last Tuesday, police paid a visit to one of the boy's relatives. "Relatives of this boy are saying it is absolutely untrue that Michael Jackson gave this family hush money in any form," Levin stated.

"CJ" traveled to LA's Simi Valley suburb to get the family's reaction to the detectives' new interest. We went to the office of the young man's father and the family's home and spoke with the mother by phone. "She was upset, to say the least," Levin said. "She wanted this whole thing to go away, never to be heard from again, and that doesn't seem to be the case."

Already on the prosecution's witness list is a young man who settled with Jackson for about $20 million in 1994, along with a former Neverland housekeeper's son, with whose family, we're told, Jackson also settled, although criminal charges were never filed.

So why won't prosecutors simply rely on the current accuser's story? "To me, this is further evidence that the prosecutor doesn't have the physical evidence it needs to nail Michael Jackson," Levin observed. "They may go into the past to try and prove some modus operandi."

We are also told that the boy who detectives have been looking at has denied being molested by Jackson. Meanwhile, the judge in the current case has yet to decide if evidence from past accusers will even be admitted.

http://community.mjeol.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=2378

I wonder if it is mentioned in his lawsuit that SB prosecutors contacted them and they told them "no" - or do they only claim that about MJ?

 

[InvincibleMJ]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^ HA! I knew it! Safechuck's refusal was to the prosecution first and I wouldn't be surprised if that was the only time he was contacted in regards to this case.

 

[HIStory]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^ HA! I knew it! Safechuck's refusal was to the prosecution first and I wouldn't be surprised if that was the only time he was contacted in regards to this case.

Yep, that's what I wonder too. If he was even approached by MJ or they just simply replace him now for the prosecution for the purposes of his current case.

 

[HIStory]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

This was a time apparently when the prosecution was running around looking for more "victims". Another article from January 8, 2005 says that they were also talking to Jeremy Jackson. Michael's nephew, Jermaine's son, about whom Gutierrez claimed to have seen that never existed tape. It shows the prosecution's desperation. Here we are talking about a claim that was tried in a court at the civil trial MJ vs. VG and VG could never produce the alleged tape, it was clearly a lie, VG lost and fled the country. Yet the Sneddon and Co. were still drilling Jeremy about it in 2005... (Also interesting to see Stacy Brown before he jumped ship):

Santa Barbara County sheriff's detectives quizzed the son of Jermaine Jackson at the teen's Calabasas home for more than an hour on Tuesday about how many times he'd been alone with his uncle and whether the pop star had ever inappropriately touched him, according to sources.

Stacy Brown, a longtime Jackson family friend, told the News-Press late Thursday: "They told him he was now 18 and that he could talk to them. . . . They asked him in a number of different ways whether Michael had any improper touching or any improper contact with him at all."

But detectives apparently left empty handed when Jeremy Jackson insisted his uncle had never molested him.

Mr. Jackson pleaded not guilty in April to child molestation and conspiracy charges. The trial, expected to last up to six months, is scheduled to begin Jan. 31 with jury selection. A gag order prohibits attorneys or witnesses from commenting.

This is not the first time Jeremy Jackson has been linked to the 1993 investigation. Detectives in that case suspected Mr. Jackson had molested numerous boys -- including his nephew -- based on statements from former Neverland Valley Ranch employees and at least one alleged victim. However, prosecutors were not able to generate enough evidence to file charges against Mr. Jackson.

"I understand what triggered the prosecution into looking into Jeremy is that his name had come up around the time of the 1993 investigation and that, yes, they're getting all of that information together for the hearing next week," Mr. Brown said.

Allegations against Mr. Jackson from former Neverland employees surfaced a decade ago. According to depositions obtained by the News-Press, the former employees said they had suspicions about Mr. Jackson's behavior.

Jeremy Jackson had just returned to his Calabasas home from celebrating his 18th birthday in Hawaii when detectives knocked on his door Tuesday, Mr. Brown said. The entertainer's nephew spoke with the detectives on his front porch and then invited them into his home.

"He kept his cool -- he just went through the process," said Mr. Brown, who stated that Jackson family members contacted him minutes after law enforcement officers left the teen's home.

"They did tell him that if he wanted other adults in his family present that they were welcome," Mr. Brown said. "His mother did at some point sit in. . . . She was very upset."

Margaret Maldonado, who has been divorced from Jermaine Jackson since the mid-90s, declined to speak with the News-Press.

"The family feels this whole thing with Jeremy is desperation and intimidation all rolled into one," Mr. Brown said. "The family just feels wholeheartedly that there is no case."

http://community.mjeol.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=2384

 

[InvincibleMJ]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Yep, that's what I wonder too. If he was even approached by MJ or they just simply replace him now for the prosecution for the purposes of his current case.

I'm thinking the latter.

This was a time apparently when the prosecution was running around looking for more "victims". Another article from January 8, 2005 says that they were also talking to Jeremy Jackson. Michael's nephew, Jermaine's son, about whom Gutierrez claimed to have seen that never existed tape. It shows the prosecution's desperation. Here we are talking about a claim that was tried in a court at the civil trial MJ vs. VG and VG could never produce the alleged tape, it was clearly a lie, VG lost and fled the country. Yet the Sneddon and Co. were still drilling Jeremy about it in 2005... (Also interesting to see Stacy Brown before he jumped ship):
http://community.mjeol.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=2384

Why Jeremy out of all nephews and cousins? That's kind of random... I got the impression Margaret was one of the most respectful people (towards Michael) out of his family and in laws. Though maybe they thought they could turn her against the Jacksons because of her battles with Jermaine? But then again It could apply to any ex-Jackson wife and her children.

 

[HIStory]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I'm thinking the latter.



Why Jeremy out of all nephews and cousins? That's kind of random...

Ask Gutierrez. IMO all of these boys names that were picked up the prosecution and the media as possible "victims" were thrown in by Gutierrez. Each and every story, minus the Arvizos, can be traced back to him. And he just threw in the name of any boy whom he saw around MJ.

 

[PopOfKing]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

We'll find out eventually if it's anything important.

I take it as the press completley lost interest? No known reporters are going to the hearing? I guess it's good we have to dig these docs out ourselves...

Doesn't it suck that we even have to worry about all of this? For some people I think Michael was just too "different" so there has to be something wrong with him. Well I doubt anyone can really know what it's like to be in his shoes. A star since a baby and then reaching the highest point of popularity ever for an entertainer. Of course he was different. He sure didn't act guilty. "Yes I allow children to have sleepovers". Only a very dumb criminal would invite scrutiny if he was up to no good. Anyway, I'm just rambling. It's all been said better before. I just hope this latest round of money grabbing is the last

 

[tricia70]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^^ Why would you want anyone on the stand at all whom you have supposedly molested over 100 times? If Safechuck claimed that MJ threatened him to stay away from the courtroom and go into hiding that would make slightly more sense. (Although even then such supposed threats would be very off-character for MJ.) But supposedly he aggressively wanted to drag him to court, even though the Judge has not decided yet about whether to introduce testimony about Safechuck or not (and later he decided that testimony about Safechuck would not be introduced). Even with Robson we noted how stupid and extremely risky it would be to put a guy on the stand whom you supposedly anally raped for years - and make him your first witness at that. So how extremely risky it would be to put Safechuck on the stand whom MJ did not even have contact any more for years at the time and Safechuck was probably also bitter at him for drifting away? So it's not like they could claim Safechuck was under MJ's control or anything.

How stupid would that be of Michael's team to call somebody that Michael supposedly molested? Obviously you call friendly witnesses that will help you out. So Michael/Mez called Safeshuck because they knew he would be a good witness. So was this statement, part of the suit? If so, I understand why judge is skeptical among other things I'm sure.

 

[dannyboy72]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

What a sad world we live in that people will lie about something as horrible as sexual abuse and destroy someone's life all for the sake of money.

 

[#MJforever57]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

What a sad world we live in that people will lie about something as horrible as sexual abuse and destroy someone's life all for the sake of money.

I agree with you i just do not understand why do ppls do this it just like Michael said in his song you do anything for money it is just sad to see.

 

[ivy]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

well it looks like there's good news

12/30/2014 at 08:31 am in Department 51, Mitchell L. Beckloff, Presiding
Ruling on Submitted Matter - Demurrer sustained with leave

12/16/2014 at 08:32 am in Department 51, Mitchell L. Beckloff, Presiding
Hearing on Demurrer ( 2X) - Submitted

It looks like judge has approved (sustained) Estate's demurrer against Safechuck's claims against MJ. He has given Safechuck a chance to amend (with leave) his complaint.

We'll need to confirm this to be sure.

edited to add: For future reference Beckloff seems to work like clockwork. His decisions come exactly in 2 weeks.

-------------------------

relevant legal info

In lay terms, a judge who "sustains" a demurrer is saying that the law does not recognize a legal claim for the facts stated by the complaining party. If the demurrer is granted "without prejudice" and/or "with leave to amend", then the plaintiff may correct errors filing a corrected, amended complaint. Demurrers sustained with prejudice are reserved for when the judge determines a plaintiff cannot cure or fix the complaint by rewriting or amending it. Depending upon the severity of the defect in a complaint, a court might sustain with prejudice on the first demurrer (very rare) or allow the plaintiff as many as three or four attempts before sustaining a demurrer to a third or fourth amended complaint with prejudice.

 

[#MJforever57]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Ivy you just may be right here just like you said about MAW he had i think 3 amended complaint before the judge dismiss.

Ivy what does this really mean?

In lay terms, a judge who "sustains" a demurrer is saying that the law does not recognize a legal claim for the facts stated by the complaining party



Because the way i see it is they claim does not fit the law and that why he is telling them to fix it but how?




What about Wade amended complaint that was due on Dec 16 ? any word on that?

 

[ivy]

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Ivy you just may be right here just like you said about MAW he had i think 3 amended complaint before the judge dismiss.

yes MAW had 3 chances to amend before his complaint was dismissed for good. As the above quote from wikipedia shows US courts are very liberal in regards to amendments and they would allow multiple chances to amend.

Ivy what does this really mean?
Because the way i see it is they claim does not fit the law and that why he is telling them to fix it but how?

You are correct again. It does basically says that Safechuck has no legal claim. As to "How to fix it", there might not be a way to fix it. These chances to amend doesn't necessarily show that the judge believes the claims are fixable and/or this deserves to go trial. The idea with the amendment is to give the plaintiff every possible chance to bring a case rather than dismissing it right of the bat.